D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Yes, the Weeping Angel malware. If anybody is interested it is among the 'vault 7' release on Wiki Leaks.
Best 4K HDR TV's for One X, PS4 Pro [2017-2020]
- Thread starter Rangers
- Start date
- Status
I used the PS3 web browser as a media player (using httpd/Apache as a server) and it worked great for video. But you won't find any reference to that working when searching via google. There are things that the internet does not know about.
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
72-zone FALD with HDR10 and Dolby Vision support, in a 55" panel for $600??
FFFFFUuuuuuuuu... why didn't I wait another 6 months before jumping gun on my Hisense 55M7000?!
I wonder though if they're grading on a curve with those reviews.
People raved about Vizios.
I was at Costco waiting for an eye exam so had an hour to look at all the TVs there. Vizios had noticeably softer picture than the Samsungs and Sonys there. Maybe the store rigged it to make the more expensive sets look better but the Vizios, which got good reviews, were cheaper so I can see a lot of people saying it's good enough or not worth paying more for the difference in picture quality.
People raved about Vizios.
I was at Costco waiting for an eye exam so had an hour to look at all the TVs there. Vizios had noticeably softer picture than the Samsungs and Sonys there. Maybe the store rigged it to make the more expensive sets look better but the Vizios, which got good reviews, were cheaper so I can see a lot of people saying it's good enough or not worth paying more for the difference in picture quality.
Unless the displays in the store are all calibrated, you really can't compare. My guess is costco does not calibrate their displays.
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
The next-cheapest FALD TV is probably the Sony X900 that costs about 4 times more than this TCL. Cheapest 4K HDR OLED from LG will cost at least 3x more than this TCL model.
"Paying more" takes a pretty big meaning here. This TV isn't even competing in price against last year's "budget kings" from Samsung, the KS7000/8000 series, which cost almost twice as much as this, and those use only edge-lit local dimming.
To all intents and purposes, this TV from TCL seems to be completely disruptive in the market.
Yeah, I was passing by some UHD Tv's in Wal Mart yesterday and noticed a Vizio M Series that looked stupendous, and Wal Mart has samsung/LG's etc on display too. And I probably wouldn't even buy a M-series since Rtings claims they are dim. Also there seems to be some issue with HDMI-1 being the only input that works with WCG yet it may not have good input lag? I'm still confused about that but it would kinda be a dealbreaker. Rtings said they should have a review on the M series mid June, I'm waiting on that.
If you read the 2nd review the guy put it against a much more expensive Sony and it did favorably, and also had a panel of people compare them, so I'm not sure how that could be grading on a curve.
Basically it isn't gonna be a $2K Samsung or Sony, but it seems 90% there for a fraction the price.
Vizio's do. Actually the entire line including the low end E-series I believe. But one big difference is zones, the TCL has 72 while the 2017 Vizio M-series has only 32, and the E-series has 10 I think. The other big difference seems to be brightness, where M and E series Vizios seem to pale next to the TCL.
The KS 8000 has been discontinued, and I dont think it really has a suitable replacement among the 2017 Samsung's. Poor form by them. It might (probably) get brighter than this TCL though. That's it's strong point, extreme brightness. I'm not sure because there is a lot of ways to measure brightness (2%, 10%, 25%, etc windows). But I think the AVS forum guy said the TCL is 600 nits regardless of window size, where the KS800 can hit 1400 nits in some windows! Still, 600 is more than plenty for me. Hell the Vizios at around 300 are highly regarded for picture quality.
This TCL seems a no brainer for me with one huge problem, the 65" isn't out yet and probably has an indefinite release date (they only said late 2017)
. I really want a 65".
The TCl amazon preorder still hasn't shipped yet so June 5 is out. Next solid word supposedly from TCl was "mid June". I'm also eagerly awaiting Rtings look at the Vizio 2017 M for more clarity on that.
If you read the 2nd review the guy put it against a much more expensive Sony and it did favorably, and also had a panel of people compare them, so I'm not sure how that could be grading on a curve.
Basically it isn't gonna be a $2K Samsung or Sony, but it seems 90% there for a fraction the price.
Vizio's do. Actually the entire line including the low end E-series I believe. But one big difference is zones, the TCL has 72 while the 2017 Vizio M-series has only 32, and the E-series has 10 I think. The other big difference seems to be brightness, where M and E series Vizios seem to pale next to the TCL.
The KS 8000 has been discontinued, and I dont think it really has a suitable replacement among the 2017 Samsung's. Poor form by them. It might (probably) get brighter than this TCL though. That's it's strong point, extreme brightness. I'm not sure because there is a lot of ways to measure brightness (2%, 10%, 25%, etc windows). But I think the AVS forum guy said the TCL is 600 nits regardless of window size, where the KS800 can hit 1400 nits in some windows! Still, 600 is more than plenty for me. Hell the Vizios at around 300 are highly regarded for picture quality.
This TCL seems a no brainer for me with one huge problem, the 65" isn't out yet and probably has an indefinite release date (they only said late 2017)
. I really want a 65".The TCl amazon preorder still hasn't shipped yet so June 5 is out. Next solid word supposedly from TCl was "mid June". I'm also eagerly awaiting Rtings look at the Vizio 2017 M for more clarity on that.
Last edited:
Reviews tend to be relative to their price bracket rather than an absolute scale. A 9/10 cheap TV won't be as good as a 9/10 expensive TV, but you only care about the range of TVs in your price range.
I'm not even saying the reviewer is necessarily conscious of it.
He's aware of the price so maybe he's more tolerant than he otherwise would be.
Same kind of dynamic as people who review wines.
Both of the reviews I've seen mention that you can do better than this TV if you pay more, but you would need to pay MUCH more.
The strength of this particular set is that TCL started with a really good panel. Obviously, this is easier for them since they are the ones making the panels. This allowed them to skimp on some of the supporting tech that normally has to be bolted on to LCDs to mitigate their flaws. The end result is that while this TV's performance doesn't have as high of a ceiling as more expensive models it also has a high floor and that floor exceeds the demands of SDR content. So non-HDR content will always look good on this set.
HDR, though, will be a mixed bag. It won't ever look bad, but bright highlights just won't be that bright. This, 120Hz, advanced motion handling and an even wider color gamut are pretty much what you will be sacrificing with this set in order to save some money. According to the AVS reviewer though, it apparently does change the refresh rate to 48Hz and strobes the backlight at 96Hz when sent content at 24fps, so it handles that OK.
Last edited:
their product lines also varies widely from country to country
I think it's perfectly fair for one reviewer to have a 9/10 TV in one price range and another 9/10 TV in a more expensive price range. As long as that's made very clear.
Otherwise all the TVs for budgets below, say, £1000, would all get 5's and 6's compared to much, much more expensive TVs, and that kinda negates the point of reviewing TVs in different price ranges.
My opinion anyway.
Otherwise all the TVs for budgets below, say, £1000, would all get 5's and 6's compared to much, much more expensive TVs, and that kinda negates the point of reviewing TVs in different price ranges.
My opinion anyway.
I think the reviewers are messing everything up. They need to have 2 ratings, one is a quality rating between 1 and 100, the second considers costs and is calculated by dividing the is quality by the cost. That way users can see where their set sits overall and which ones are the knock out bargains.
Or that. Either way, price brackets must be considered. In everything, I dare say! No one reviews a new BMW next to a Panda.
Keep the reviews coming on your experience with the KS. I'm still on the market looking for something by October
Wouldn't work because of years. The best TV in 2014 would score 10/10. Then a better TV comes out in 2017... Just as scores are grouped by price, they're also grouped by age.
I suppose you'd either need a limitless benchmark score that just goes up and up each year as tech improves, or a score measured against an absolutely perfect standard.
ahh.. score inflation
This is what they use for GPU benchmarks right?
Yes, that's what I was thinking of. You could have a TVMark and a big ass chart like this...
with every TV model going back forever. That 10/10 Sony Trinitron from 1992 would be way down such a list.
with every TV model going back forever. That 10/10 Sony Trinitron from 1992 would be way down such a list.
- Status
